| Title |
|
Running Out of (Legal) Excuses: Extended Nuclear Deterrence in the Era of the Prohibition Treaty |
|
|
| Publication Date |
|
| Author(s) |
|
| Editor |
|
Editor(s): Jonathan L Black-Branch, Dieter Fleck |
|
|
| Type of document |
|
| Language |
|
| Entity Type |
|
| Publisher |
|
| Place of publication |
|
| DOI |
|
10.1007/978-94-6265-347-4_13 |
|
|
| UNE publication id |
|
| Abstract |
|
Since the adoption of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW), States that rely on extended nuclear deterrence as a cornerstone of their security policy are now in a less legally defensible position with respect to their obligations under Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Using Australia as the primary example, this chapter argues that the hostility of nuclear umbrella States towards the TPNW undermines their contention that they remain committed to nuclear disarmament under Article VI. It demonstrates that Australia's main criticism of the TPNW-that banning nuclear weapons is not an effective measure for disarmament is a weak legal justification designed to mask the fact that it is prioritising nuclear deterrence over nuclear elimination. |
|
|
| Link |
|
| Citation |
|
Nuclear Non-Proliferation in International Law: Legal Challenges for Nuclear Security and Deterrence, v.5, p. 269-290 |
|
|
| ISBN |
|
| Start page |
|
| End page |
|